When I used to handle these type responses, I remember that if there were any serious injuries the media would note if the rider wasn't wearing a helmet (or an unapproved helmet) but not once did I ever read that the rider was properly attired. I remember once a guy on a stolen bike didn't make a curve on a raised portion of interstate (doing in excess of 100 mph), bike stayed on the pavement, rider wound up impaled on a traffic sign 25 feet below. TV reported he was not wearing a helmet, I was always curious just what difference they presume it would have made (for that matter, he could have been wearing a suit of armor, still wouldn't have helped) An acquaintance of mine died after turning directly in front of an oncoming semi, first question from media was if he were wearing a helmet. He was indeed, so it was never mentioned. For safetycrats, it's not enough to say your head will be somewhat safer with an approved helmet, better to perpetuate the myth that no one is ever injured wearing a helmet (even with shorts and flip flops), and riding without is certain death.
